Greenland’s Melting Ice Nears a ‘Tipping Point,’

[Tim the plumber]

Re: Greenland's Melting Ice Nears a Tipping Point

This is such obvious BS. The area of the Mississippi watershed is about 1.5 times the entire surface area of Greenland, and it also has more precipitation that Greenland. So why the hell would Greenland needs 18 Mississippis worth of flow to break even?

Because the rain fall is taken up by the ground, evaporated and transpirated into the air. Only a small percentage ends up going down the river. Also the precipitation on Greenland is fairly high on average.

 

[Surface Detail]

Re: Greenland's Melting Ice Nears a Tipping Point

Because the rain fall is taken up by the ground, evaporated and transpirated into the air. Only a small percentage ends up going down the river. Also the precipitation on Greenland is fairly high on average.

What percentage?

 

[Tim the plumber]

Re: Greenland's Melting Ice Nears a Tipping Point

What percentage?

I don't know.

I get the numbers from;

Flow rate of Mississippi - Google Search

And a 350mm precipitation figure for the average of Greenland.

I have cherry picked the Mississippi because it is a surprisingly low flow rate for such a long and well know river. The Ganges/Brahmaputra is massive by comparison.

 

[Surface Detail]

Re: Greenland's Melting Ice Nears a Tipping Point

I don't know.

I get the numbers from;

Flow rate of Mississippi - Google Search

And a 350mm precipitation figure for the average of Greenland.

I have cherry picked the Mississippi because it is a surprisingly low flow rate for such a long and well know river. The Ganges/Brahmaputra is massive by comparison.

Using your 350 mm precipitation figure, I get an average flow rate of about 24,000 m[SUP]3[/SUP]/s required to drain Greenland. That's about 1.5 Mississippis, and a large fraction of that is lost as iceberg calving. So where do your 18 Mississippis come from?

 

[Tim the plumber]

Re: Greenland's Melting Ice Nears a Tipping Point

Using your 350 mm precipitation figure, I get an average flow rate of about 24,000 m[SUP]3[/SUP]/s required to drain Greenland. That's about 1.5 Mississippis, and a large fraction of that is lost as iceberg calving. So where do your 18 Mississippis come from?

18 Mississippi months.

That is the flow rate of the Mississippi for 18 months. Same number as you.

The melt season of Greenland is less than a month for the Interior and the North to a maximum of about 2 months in the Southern tip area.

 

[Surface Detail]

Re: Greenland's Melting Ice Nears a Tipping Point

18 Mississippi months.

That is the flow rate of the Mississippi for 18 months. Same number as you.

The melt season of Greenland is less than a month for the Interior and the North to a maximum of about 2 months in the Southern tip area.

It doesn't seem remotely implausible to me that the amount of water and ice flowing out through the entire coastline of Greenland is roughly equal to 1.5 Mississippis.

 

[Steve Case]

Re: Greenland's Melting Ice Nears a Tipping Point

Essentially your arguments boil down to "it was probably always doing that" and "it's probably BS". Not exactly convincing!

You are in effect claiming that observations of processes that we see in
Greenland today weren't occurring in the past. Which observations are
those? How do we know they weren't occurring decades or centuries ago?

Are the rivulets disappearing down moulins a new thing? If so how do
we know? Are the radar images of pockets of water that were talked
about in that TED talk a new thing and didn't exist in 1900? If so how
do we know? Do you really believe that link that was posted up here
that said that Greenland has shifted gears and now the ice loss is due
to surface melt?

How much BS are you willing to swallow hook line and sinker before you
cry Uncle?

 

[Tim the plumber]

Re: Greenland's Melting Ice Nears a Tipping Point

It doesn't seem remotely implausible to me that the amount of water and ice flowing out through the entire coastline of Greenland is roughly equal to 1.5 Mississippis.

I agree during the height of summer.

During the winter when there is no ice melt, not significant ice calving and little movement of the glaciers though it will be a lot less.

 

[Lord of Planar]

Re: Greenland's Melting Ice Nears a Tipping Point

If I could figure out what the point is you're trying to make is, I'd provide a response.

He's thinks he's showing us our ignorance, but exposing his instead.

 

[Threegoofs]

Re: Greenland's Melting Ice Nears a Tipping Point

It doesn't seem remotely implausible to me that the amount of water and ice flowing out through the entire coastline of Greenland is roughly equal to 1.5 Mississippis.

Look... Tim knows math, and deals with running water a lot, so clearly he’s an expert on Greenland, glaciers, the Arctic, and climate change.

 

[Steve Case]

Re: Greenland's Melting Ice Nears a Tipping Point

...During the winter ... not significant ice calving ...

I'd like to know how much calving of bergs there is in the Arctic
and Antarctic winters. It might put some perspective on how
much temperature has to due with the ice balance question.

 

[Steve Case]

Re: Greenland's Melting Ice Nears a Tipping Point

It doesn't seem remotely implausible to me that the amount of water and ice flowing out through the entire coastline of Greenland is roughly equal to 1.5 Mississippis.

We are told how much Greenland contributes to sea level rise. Let me Google that:
0.14–0.28 mm/year for the period 1993–2003
That's no doubt a lot of water. Considering that the usual suspects exaggerate pretty
much everything, your gut reaction is probably right but one Mississippi might be
close to the truth.

At the moment I don't have the time to look up the area of the world ocean and the
annual flow of the Mississippi and fire up my Excel spreadsheet to do the arithmetic,
but it wouldn't be difficult. Why don't you have a go at it?

 

[Threegoofs]

Re: Greenland's Melting Ice Nears a Tipping Point

I'd like to know how much calving of bergs there is in the Arctic
and Antarctic winters. It might put some perspective on how
much temperature has to due with the ice balance question.

Translation:

“I don’t know anything about the basics of ice mass balance in Greenland, but all the experts are wrong because Climate Change is a hoax.”

 

[Lord of Planar]

Re: Greenland's Melting Ice Nears a Tipping Point

I'd like to know how much calving of bergs there is in the Arctic
and Antarctic winters. It might put some perspective on how
much temperature has to due with the ice balance question.

Temperature isn't the only factor. Vibrational forces from tides and earthquakes. As they flow outward, because the earth is spherical, they expand laterally and likely crack.

 

[Tim the plumber]

Re: Greenland's Melting Ice Nears a Tipping Point

I'd like to know how much calving of bergs there is in the Arctic
and Antarctic winters. It might put some perspective on how
much temperature has to due with the ice balance question.

Well you don't get them being a danger to shipping other than during the melt season.

 

[Tim the plumber]

Re: Greenland's Melting Ice Nears a Tipping Point

We are told how much Greenland contributes to sea level rise. Let me Google that:
0.14–0.28 mm/year for the period 1993–2003
That's no doubt a lot of water. Considering that the usual suspects exaggerate pretty
much everything, your gut reaction is probably right but one Mississippi might be
close to the truth.

At the moment I don't have the time to look up the area of the world ocean and the
annual flow of the Mississippi and fire up my Excel spreadsheet to do the arithmetic,
but it wouldn't be difficult. Why don't you have a go at it?

That's 72Gt/yr.

That is not the 300-400+Gt they normally claim.

 

[Tim the plumber]

Re: Greenland's Melting Ice Nears a Tipping Point

Temperature isn't the only factor. Vibrational forces from tides and earthquakes. As they flow outward, because the earth is spherical, they expand laterally and likely crack.

True a bit for Antarctica but not significant at all in Greenland.

Wind is the biggest driver of ice calving especially in Antarctica.

Once the ice has left the land that is.

 

[Lord of Planar]

Re: Greenland's Melting Ice Nears a Tipping Point

True a bit for Antarctica but not significant at all in Greenland.

Wind is the biggest driver of ice calving especially in Antarctica.

Once the ice has left the land that is.

Yes, wind is another chaotic factor that modulates other climate variables. H2O evaporation and CO2 mixing in the seas are two more.

 

[Tim the plumber]

Re: Greenland's Melting Ice Nears a Tipping Point

Yes, wind is another chaotic factor that modulates other climate variables. H2O evaporation and CO2 mixing in the seas are two more.

I was thinking more of the "Massive ice burg the size of Belgium has broken off Antarctica......". The strength of the mechanical bond of the ice 3km thick vs the force of the water flowing across the bottom of the ice shelf 300km in distance between the land and the front edge of this ice shelf. The current is likely to be going at 3mph or so.

The wind at 200mph across the top however is much more powerful.

 

[Visbek]

Re: Greenland's Melting Ice Nears a Tipping Point

From Wikipedia a fjord or fiord ... is a long, narrow inlet
with steep sides or cliffs, created by a glacier.
​

Key words in that are "Created by a glacier."

Why do you think that matters? Are you really suggesting that water can't flow off of an ice sheet because fjords were created by glaciers? lol

If so,there always have been, it's not a new thing

Who ever said that glacial and meltwater flows never happened before? No one. Stop with the straw man arguments.

The difference is that ice mass loss is accelerating. Try to keep up.

Yes, but you're claiming there's more melt water right?
And the evidence for that is?

Read the links. Here's another one for you.

Greenland ice melting rapidly, study finds

If there's water flowing under the ice sheet, then there's always been water flowing under the ice sheet. It wouldn't be new.

No one said that meltwater has never flowed under the ice sheet. Stop with the straw man arguments.

Glaciers are the big players in Greenland's ice mass balance.
The rivers that you can't even find on a map barely make a
contribution.

Egads. More straw man garbage. I even said in my post that calving and glacial retreat are part of the ice mass loss.

(I'd add that if you think that "warmer temperatures can't cause more ice mass loss," that is obviously wrong, to the point of absurdity.)

Anyway. Guess what? Scientists are able to locate those rivers and streams and channels, and are doing research on them, including figuring out whether that water actually does go into the ocean. (Spoiler alert! It does.)

It's obviously necessary for climate science to make that finding.
Calving ice bergs doesn't fit the narrative.

Egads. Again! The accelerating loss of ice mass does not dependent upon the mechanisms by which the mass is lost. No one, I repeat no one, is saying "there is no calving" or "there is no glacial retreat." Both of those and meltwater losses are happening.

If Greenland was losing more ice via glacial retreat, for example, then scientists would say "glacial retreat is accelerating." Sheesh.

Let's pretend that small
streams on the surface disappearing down moulins have more
impact than the entire coast line of 1,000 foot thick glaciers calving
into the sea.

Or: Let's look at the actual scientific research.

It's difficult dealing with bald faced lies.

Yeah, thing is? You've offered nothing to refute the scientific research. What a surprise.

If the temperature is still below freezing there won't be any melting.

zomg... The absurdities continue. Guess what? Temperatures in parts of the ice sheet rise above freezing. When that happens, the ice melts, and flows into and out of the ice sheet. What a concept.

You know what? Sea level is rising and the water has to be coming from somewhere,
and Antarctica and Greenland are good bets to be that somewhere.

...yes, but scientists are moving beyond educated guesses and into actual research. You do understand that, right?

That's most probably BS

Yeah, thing is? Merely saying "that's BS" while completely ignoring the scientific evidence is not an argument.

More BS. Ice loss or gain in Antarctica and Greenland is a function of snowfall and the
calving of icebergs. The two events are separated in time by decades centuries or longer.

Repetition is not an argument. Nor is, yet again, completely ignoring the scientific evidence.

I'd also add that it's not like warming started 10 years ago. The planet, including Greenland, started warming about 250 years ago, with a lot of that warming happening *cough* in the last 10 decades. Thus, pointing out delays in glacial flows does not in any way, shape or form, refute the fact that ice mass loss is accelerating due to increasing temperatures. It means that we've already locked in lots of future melting, and the worst is yet to come.

Claiming it's due to warming (A degree over the last 200 years) fits the narrative.

It "fits the narrative" because the narrative is based on facts. What a concept.

 

[Visbek]

Re: Greenland's Melting Ice Nears a Tipping Point

If there is a river the size of the Mississippi running under a glacier....

We've discussed this ad nauseam. Your argument is flat-out ridiculous, because you utterly refuse to accept the size of Greenland, the actual objective recorded water flows, and more. I have no interest whatsoever in making it seem like your bull**** claims have any validity whatsoever. Next time, take the hint.

 

[Jack Hays]

Re: Greenland's Melting Ice Nears a Tipping Point

Why do you think that matters? Are you really suggesting that water can't flow off of an ice sheet because fjords were created . . . .



Who ever said that glacial and meltwater flows never happened before? No one. Stop with the straw man arguments.

The difference is that ice mass loss is accelerating. Try to keep up. . . .


Egads. More straw man garbage. I even said in my post that calving and glacial retreat are part of the ice mass loss.

(I'd add that if you think that "warmer temperatures can't cause more ice mass loss," that is obviously wrong, to the point of absurdity.)

Anyway. Guess what? Scientists are able to locate those rivers and streams and channels, and are doing research on them, including figuring out whether that water actually does go into the ocean. (Spoiler alert! It does.)



Egads. Again! The accelerating loss of ice mass does not dependent upon the mechanisms by which the mass is lost. No one, I repeat no one, is saying "there is no calving" or "there is no glacial retreat." Both of those and meltwater losses are happening.

If Greenland was losing more ice via glacial retreat, for example, then scientists would say "glacial retreat is accelerating." Sheesh.



Or: Let's look at the actual scientific research.



Yeah, thing is? You've offered nothing to refute the scientific research. What a surprise.



zomg... The absurdities continue. Guess what? Temperatures in parts of the ice sheet rise above freezing. When that happens, the ice melts, and flows into and out of the ice sheet. What a concept.



...yes, but scientists are moving beyond educated guesses and into actual research. You do understand that, right?



Yeah, thing is? Merely saying "that's BS" while completely ignoring the scientific evidence is not an argument.



Repetition is not an argument. Nor is, yet again, completely ignoring the scientific evidence.

I'd also add that it's not like warming started 10 years ago. The planet, including Greenland, started warming about 250 years ago, with a lot of that warming happening *cough* in the last 10 decades. Thus, pointing out delays in glacial flows does not in any way, shape or form, refute the fact that ice mass loss is accelerating due to increasing temperatures. It means that we've already locked in lots of future melting, and the worst is yet to come.



It "fits the narrative" because the narrative is based on facts. What a concept.

. . . If we removed all ice from Greenland, the land would reveal a bowl-shape. A ring of mountains paralleling the coastline prevents the ice cap from sliding into the sea, no matter what scary climate stories suggest. Several gaps in those mountains allow glaciers to transport ice from inside “the bowl” to the oceans. Given enough time the Lost Squadron may well have been shuttled out to sea. Whenever more ice accumulates inside the “bowl” than leaks out via glaciers, Greenland gains ice and sea levels fall. If more ice reaches the ocean than accumulates inland, sea level rises. But predicting any imbalance is difficult.
During the last 100 years, Greenland oscillated between gaining and losing ice. Its greatest loss raised sea level by 0.07 inches in 2012, about half the total sea level rise of 0.12 inches a year. That accelerated loss was trumpeted as just what climate models predict. However, Greenland’s melt rates then declined and by 2017 it was gaining enough ice to slightly reduce sea level rise. . . .


A Sea Level Rise Conundrum – Greenland’s Cycles

By Jim Steele After France fell to the Nazis, Britain desperately prepared for an invasion. The United States shuttled hundreds of planes to England via the Snowball Route, a series of secret bases on Newfoundland, Greenland and Iceland. But in 1942 one squadron never completed the journey. A sudden July storm forced 8 planes to…

2 days ago March 21, 2019 in Sea level.

 

[Tim the plumber]

Re: Greenland's Melting Ice Nears a Tipping Point

We've discussed this ad nauseam. Your argument is flat-out ridiculous, because you utterly refuse to accept the size of Greenland, the actual objective recorded water flows, and more. I have no interest whatsoever in making it seem like your bull**** claims have any validity whatsoever. Next time, take the hint.

Greenland - Big.

Water flows as listed much bigger, like twice the flow rate occasionally three times, that of the Mississippi which creates sediment plumes all the way along the gulf of Mexico. These get about 100m across the fjord.

That it is bleeding obvious that there is a con going on is not my fault.

 

[Tim the plumber]

Re: Greenland's Melting Ice Nears a Tipping Point

[FONT=&]. . . If we removed all ice from Greenland, the land would reveal a bowl-shape. A ring of mountains paralleling the coastline prevents the ice cap from sliding into the sea, no matter what scary climate stories suggest. Several gaps in those mountains allow glaciers to transport ice from inside “the bowl” to the oceans. Given enough time the Lost Squadron may well have been shuttled out to sea. Whenever more ice accumulates inside the “bowl” than leaks out via glaciers, Greenland gains ice and sea levels fall. If more ice reaches the ocean than accumulates inland, sea level rises. But predicting any imbalance is difficult.[/FONT]
[FONT=&]During the last 100 years, Greenland oscillated between gaining and losing ice. Its greatest loss raised sea level by 0.07 inches in 2012, about half the total sea level rise of 0.12 inches a year. That accelerated loss was trumpeted as just what climate models predict. However, Greenland’s melt rates then declined and by 2017 it was gaining enough ice to slightly reduce sea level rise. . . . [/FONT]

[FONT=&][/FONT]
A Sea Level Rise Conundrum – Greenland’s Cycles

[FONT=&]By Jim Steele After France fell to the Nazis, Britain desperately prepared for an invasion. The United States shuttled hundreds of planes to England via the Snowball Route, a series of secret bases on Newfoundland, Greenland and Iceland. But in 1942 one squadron never completed the journey. A sudden July storm forced 8 planes to…
[/FONT]
2 days ago March 21, 2019 in Sea level.

0.07 inches, about 2mm. 720Gt or 720 cubic kilometers of ice melt.

My arse did it!

 

[Lord of Planar]

Re: Greenland's Melting Ice Nears a Tipping Point

Anyone watching the video notice how dirty the ice is with aerosols from the sky? This is the worse I have ever seen of glacier ice. How dark they are must be from all the coal plants in northern Asia. The darker, the more radiant energy is absorbed. You can bet the melting is far greater due to the darkening of the ice, over any minor temperature or CO2 spectral increases.